Kramerica Industries

I thought that plaid phase was just that - a phase - back in 2010. If memory serves, they even had one of their theme roadtrips with everyone wearing double-blue plaid sportcoats. I haven't seen anyone wear those caps around here since that year.

The only reason the Giants looked bad in red jerseys is because, well, they are "Big Blue", so wearing red never made any sense. If they were ever going to wear alts, they should've gone the throwback route. As it is, the Giants really don't need alts.

Did they rip off Dallas' font?

The awkward, non-matching collar and tiny wordmark on the blue uniform's make them a distant third compared to the rock solid white and black sets.

Here's one: I like the new SF Giants roads over the old roads. I mean, they could use more consistency with the placket piping, but there's something about placket piping that feels so right. *Actually, I retract that. I like the simple thin piping as well. Would look cluttered with orange/black/orange piping on both the sleeves and placket.

Not sure that's all that unpopular of an opinion around here. If anything, there's a consensus that pretty much every team that traditionally wore royal looked worse after switching to navy. Was actually a response to the previous commenter about the Pats 93-99 duds looking better if it were in navy, instead of royal, but I took the lazy "quick reply" route. Sorry if that confused anyone.

Royal > Navy In most cases, in my opinion, and certainly in that case. Then again, I loathe navy blue, so I could definitely be wrong.

Lack of hem stripes, the ridiculous socks, and the black and blue not having anything to break them up... Three huge strikes against that uniform set.

The blue jerseys look so lazy, though. I'm not even sure white or black would've looked below below the diagonal stripe, but blue following the blue doesn't look good. I also don't think that color scheme ever really worked for either D.C. team, because it doesn't look D.C.-esque. Call that stupid, but D.C. is a R/W/B city.

The Lakers need to wear the white uniforms full-time at home. They have one of the best-looking white uniforms in the league. If the golds weren't already so ingrained with history and looking good, I would agree. The Laker whites are some fantastic uniforms. As are those original Coyotes jerseys, but I've already said that on a few occasions. Can't agree at all with the Thrasher's powder blue's, pre-EDGE or post-EDGE. The asymmetrical design was brutally garish from the moment I first saw them. The pic on the left looks like black, while the pic on the right still looks like navy. Given the appearance of yellow, I would guess that it's supposed to be black. I thought the Hawks used to have an outstanding color scheme with those three as well, and they would look better with black than navy in their present sets. Red-navy-white just doesn't cut it for me anymore, given how widespread it is (and yes, I'm aware red-black is also very common, but it's not used as much, and personally, that's my favorite color combination).

Canucks belong in green and royal blue - but those are two fantastic uniforms by themselves. I would've loved to see how red/orange looks in that template.

In part because it dredges their look down to the usual, all-black dreariness that unfortunately rears its head too much. Surprisingly, their teal is too dark to provide enough contrast. It doesn't blend, but it doesn't stand out, either. Better off wearing the teal sets in the playoffs.

Half stripes are flawed as it is. In what way did it make sense to put the half on the bottom, lesser-seen side of the sleeve?

They broke it up with silver helmets and white socks, so it flowed better. I think the Bears also did mono-navy a couple times, though the Bears not wearing blue/white at home doesn't seem right at all.

What about the copy from Jerry? I hear it's amazing.

Except that everything about it screams "fake." The jersey mesh, bubbly numbers, shoddy sleeve logo and super-tight neck. I'm going to disagree here - maybe to a neurotic blowhard like you it would look fake, but I would be willing to bet that 9 out of 10 people (if not more!) people on the street wouldn't be able to tell the difference. Oh, and they probably wouldn't care either, if they found out. Because balanced people aren't obsessed with pointing out who of the random people they see in public are wearing "fakes" and who aren't. LOL, was that meant to be a question? You are a dumb consumer, then. Congratulations on being duped and wasting your money. Have fun buying unnecessarily overpriced jerseys every year, while the more enlightened folks spend less money for a equal or higher quality product. Everything you said is true. But of course, it's impossible in this thread to have an actual conversation because if you post anything that isn't bashing buying fake jerseys, then you can expect a response: "You support IP theft. It's illegal!!!!" Why even start a thread if you're going to shoot down what everyone else says with the same argument every time? This is partially because the OP itself is kind of a loaded question type. It's hard to argue "in favour" of fakes because from the outset we see all the (legit) arguments against them. It would only stand to reason that those sentiments would return to the surface each time there is support for the production of counterfeits. The only real problem is that this thread manifests itself as basically a pile-on thread, with little real ability to play the role of devil's advocate without being rebuffed with the same arguments time and time again. Hell, the subtitle of this thread basically sets the tone before anyone even opens this thread up.

Fix the crammed "Tampa Bay" on the bottom hem, and that's actually better than what the Lightning currently have. That is, of course, to say nothing of the crest or piping, both of which are equally bad.

I'm the opposite. Lose the diagonal stripe on the front and these are perfect. That front diagonal stripe is the only thing I dislike about this uniform set. To me, the diagonal stripe gives it a cache that no other uniform has or had in the NHL. It basically serves as an item upon which the flaming C is sitting upon. Much better than the crap Calgary wears right now.

I also agree that the Pacers looked fine in pinstripes. Certainly better than that they wore before and what they've worn since. I also liked the Pistons in their non RWB days, though given their history and success wearing RWB, it was the right move to go back to it full-time.

If it's unpopular, then I guess I share your unpopular opinion. I think that a lot of the dislike for the Coyotes' uniforms stems from a dislike of the Coyotes themselves, like from angry Quebecois hockey fans who want a second team. The Coyotes set is poor because it is a stripped-down, generic and bland look compared to their original look from when they moved to the desert. It's sedona red and white, with a touch of wheat. No hem stripes, leaving the home set especially empty. They actually looked better design-wise prior to the EDGE transition, albeit not as good as their original look.

Remove the gold from that jersey and it is much more presentable. To me, it looks like a confluence of ketchup and mustard. Awful clash of gold and red.

He is right about Memphis, however. Black, red, and teal was a unique scheme in basketball and among major North American sports, and certainly better than the overdone, double blue look. The best thing in their current set is their alternate jersey, as well, making it even worse. I thought the font in the past was awful, but the overall template was nice.

wrong thread, apologies.

I much prefer the Texas Rangers when they wear the red hats/socks with their home whites rather than the blue. The contrast and pop factor is much stronger in red.